We have detected that cookies are not enabled on your browser. Please enable cookies to ensure the proper experience.
Warning: JavaScript is required for some functionalities of this page. Please enable the use of JavaScript in your browser. Log In
Register My Account
Log Out (%1$s)

We have detected that cookies are not enabled on your browser. Please enable cookies to ensure the proper experience.

Warning: JavaScript is required for some functionalities of this page. Please enable the use of JavaScript in your browser.

Could we judge the use of rethoric (like for example terms like 'louzy' and 'twisting words') as an attempt of manipulation/trickery?

Are we to judge the wish of another to make us share their view, as an overall 'evil' personality trait of theirs, which aims at domination for nothing but the sake of being right or to simply rule us?
Or may it be rather that they just feel passionate about this issue and therefore wish us to join in with their beliefs, possibly even for the 'better' of the world...

We surely wish to give those we encounter in debates the benefit of a doubt, even though we will certainly not assume they once were an outstanding Maia who played his God's music as intened.
(It could be argued they have not raised an army and gone to force us via violance to follow their view point, but for all we know, these are early days, and who knows what could still happen..?)

Anyway, I personally believe we all have deep underlying reasons why we swing one way or another in our view about Sauron. For some it might be important to see him as a clear cut evil villain, while others feel a need to investigate his motivation more in depths. I think I need my view to remain open-minded to others as well as self critical in regards to myself. I shall not make public judgements as for the reasons why others might rather want to see him as the absolute evil, although surely we all silently make judgments of some sort - still, the art is to stay respectful nonetheless and to ultimately understand that 'the truth' in issues like this is not simple mathematic where 1+1=2

Hermes has done a brilliant job of saying exactly what I wanted to say, but I'll just do this little bit..

Originally Posted by Al.

Clearly YOU don't understand, order wasn't the end goal for sauron, his goal was DOMINION and twisting the very world to his ideals (EVIL) making EVIL triumph over GOOD.

Tolkien would disagree.

"Some reviewers have called the whole thing simple-minded, just a plain fight between Good and Evil, with all the good just good, and the bad just bad."

Originally Posted by Al.

GOOD vs EVIL is the main theme of Tolkien, its not simple of course but thats it, the free people goal was to get rid of evil through alliances, inspiration, coordination and common good.

Again, this is literally the polar opposite of what Tolkien says about his works, and what any discerning reader will glean themselves.

Originally Posted by Al.

purely evil for me is means been wholly evil, the author by the way sees Sauron and Melkor both as evil just as I do, you are the one trying to justify their means "Sauron feeling humiliated" his order was a virtue, etc....Sauron was a Dark Lord, not a Noble lord.

You're drawing completely the opposite conclusions from what Tolkien explicitly states. Any and all quotes attributed to Tolkien say that while Sauron fell from grace and did a great many evil things his intent was to improve the world as he saw it. I won't post the quotes here since I, and others, have posted them time and again yet you choose to ignore facts and logic.

No one here, other than you, is twisting words or being so stubbornly polar about this debate. Tolkien repeatedly states that there is no absolute evil in his works. He also repeatedly underlines Sauron's twisted desire to improve the world and his lack of desire for absolute destruction. You're so hung up on the idea that Sauron wanted to destroy the children of Eru. Why? Tolkien never wrote this, in the texts or his letters. He was betrayed and threatened by Ar Pharazon, so obviously he sought revenge on that front. Waging a war is not tantamount to wishing the utter destruction of the people you fight. Gondor's army is not Gondor. If he killed every last soldier in Gondor's fighting force, that does not equate to destroying the people of Gondor. There is still land, cities, villages and people there to be governed. The same goes for every other nation that opposed him.

You accuse others of being "too much in Sauron's shoes". Maybe we're just willing to accept what is written by Tolkien, and what the real world is like. You seem to be far too fixated on the idea of polar evil.

[CENTER][I][FONT=georgia]"Never laugh at live dragons"[/FONT][/I]
[/CENTER]

Real life causes are not clear cut because human tyrants are seldom utterly corrupted into pure evil will. Even the most corrupt have followers only partly as corrupt, and many leaders still need to have "good motives". In conflicts about important things or ideas Tolkien was most impressed with the importance of being on the right side. If a side has the right, which depended on values and beliefs above and independent of a particular conflict, then it justifies that side's cause throughout.

Tolkien spoke not of individuals. The rightness of a cause will not justify the actions of its supporters who are morally wicked. Aggressors are primarily to blame for evil deeds proceeding from their original violation of justice. They had no right to demand that their assaulted victims should not demand an eye for an eye. Similarly, good actions do not justify the wrong side. One may honour and rejoice at acts heroic courage or deeds of mercy, but it still would not alter a judgment as to which side was right.

His story did not deal with Absolute Evil, said Tolkien, doubting that there is such a thing. No rational being is wholly evil. Sauron was as near an approach to the wholly evil will as is possible. Yet he had begun well, at least on the level of desiring to order all things according to his own wisdom. But he went further than any human tyrant in pride and lust for domination, being in origin an immortal spirit, of the same kind as Gandalf and Saruman but of a far higher order. In The Lord of the Rings the basic conflict was not about "freedom" (though it was involved), but about God and His sole right to divine honour. The Eldar and Númenóreans believed in The One and held worship of any other an abomination.

Sauron desired to be a God-King. He was thrice involved in treachery: First, admiring strength, he had followed Morgoth and become his chief agent in Middle-earth. Second, when Morgoth fell he forsook his allegiance, but from fear only and remained in Middle-earth. Third, seeing how his knowledge was greatly admired and how easy it was to influence other rational creatures, he re-assumed the position of Morgoth's representative in the Second Age. By the end of the Third Age, although actually weaker than before, he claimed, in his pride, to be Morgoth returned. If victorious he would have demanded divine honour and absolute temporal power over all. Even if "the West" had bred or hired orcs or ravaged the lands of other men, their cause would have remained indefeasibly right.

Thus the fiddle-faddle in reviews, said Tolkien, as to whether his "good people" were kind and merciful and gave quarter (which they did) was beside the point. Some critics seemed determined to represent him as a simple-minded adolescent and willfully distorted what was said in his tale. Denethor alone proved this but none of the people on the "right side" were any better than men have been, are, or could be. Middle-earth is not an "imaginary" world but an imaginary historical moment in our habitation

TOLKIEN LETTER#183 Summary
Source: Tolkien gateway

Tolkien doubts there is absolute evil: Correct, yet he makes emphasis on "right side" and "wrong side", basically there are exceptions to the rule like Denethor, Boromir, Saruman who are complex characters with motives. Sauron isn't that complex and tolkien continues to give an explanation about Sauron and Morgoth.

Sauron wanted to rule called God-king by the free peoples (free willed peoples of middle earth), sure he had motives for doing so but those motives were evil at least distorted "perspective" because their end goal according to tolkien was domination.

Tolkien doubts there is absolute evil: Correct, yet he makes emphasis on "right side" and "wrong side", basically there are exceptions to the rule like Denethor, Boromir, Saruman who are complex characters with motives. Sauron isn't that complex and tolkien continues to give an explanation about Sauron and Morgoth.

First of all, that is not a letter. That is the summary of a letter made by someone on Tolkien gateway. It is not written by Tolkien.
If anything, *you* are the one feeding inaccurate sources of what Tolkien said or did not say. I suggest you read the actual letter first.

Secondly, the letter only disproves your point. It states that Sauron is not wholly evil and that he wanted power and dominion. Since you have just (finally) proven he is not absolute evil, it is impossible that he wanted dominion just for the sake of dominion. Which brings us back around to his goal; his desire to rule over others comes forth from his initial desire to make the world better as he envisioned it.

As you kindly point out"Tolkien spoke not of individuals. The rightness of a cause will not justify the actions of its supporters who are morally wicked. Aggressors are primarily to blame for evil deeds proceeding from their original violation of justice. They had no right to demand that their assaulted victims should not demand an eye for an eye. Similarly, good actions do not justify the wrong side. One may honour and rejoice at acts heroic courage or deeds of mercy, but it still would not alter a judgment as to which side was right."

So no matter how good and well-meant Sauron's intentions were, he was always going to be thrown in with the evil side because of his evil ways.

Sauron wanted to rule called God-king by the free peoples (free willed peoples of middle earth), sure he had motives for doing so but those motives were evil at least distorted "perspective" because their end goal according to tolkien was domination.

For the first part of that; that is the point we have been trying to bring across to you. Sauron had a distorted perspective, but his goal was just. He wanted to rule all other sentient beings, he wanted dominion, he wanted everyone to do as they were told because he thought he knew how to improve the world better than anyone else. A distorted view yes, but a good intention.
And what's wrong with being called a God-king when that is what you are to people?

As for the end goal being domination; No, the summary you just provided says the exact opposite. "In The Lord of the Rings the basic conflict was not about "freedom" (though it was involved), but about God and His sole right to divine honour."
So as you can read for yourself, freedom vs domination is not the basic conflict. It is whether or not Sauron was right to wanting to improve the world.
To which the answer is not a simple one. On the one hand he was wrong ofcourse, since that power lay only with Eru, but his initial wanting to do it for the sake of others was a right thing to do. Sauron saw himself as the best man for the job to improve Arda, since he was of the people of Aulë and knowledgeable in the shaping of matter. Perhaps he did not want the inhabitants of Middle-earth to wait for the Dagor Dagorath to get the "perfect" world, or perhaps he just saw the chaos in the marred world and it was an eye-sore to him since he loved order so. Whatever the cause that started his whole campaign, he started it out with good intentions, and all his wars come forth from that single decision he made.

Basically this letter proves my point.

This might be because english is not your native tongue, but you are lamentable at reading his work and deducting the meaning of its content.

Lastly, I would just like to ask, was that summary you provided all you had to attempt to refute my arguments? If so, does that mean you agree with all my other arguments that you didn't touch?
And does this mean you take back what you said about "false" source material I gave? You made no attempt to provide the "correct" ones even after I asked you.

Last edited by BirdofHermes; Aug 18 2012 at 12:28 PM.

[I]In the sea without lees standeth the Bird of Hermes.
[/I][I]When all his feathers be from him gone, He standeth still here as a stone.
Here is now both white and red, And all so the stone to quicken the dead[/I][I].
The Bird of Hermes is my name, Eating my wings to make me tame.[/I]

It absolutely does not. That is someone else's interpretation of a letter, and even then does not hold any "proof" of your point.

You keep throwing out terms like "God-King" and "Dark Lord" but they are meaningless. What do you think the Orcs called Aragorn, Glorfindel or Gandalf? I doubt they had endearing, friendly names for them.

The arguments made in all your quotes and sources are not ones for absolute evil, repeatedly they concede that Sauron is not this. Instead they argue about the way he behaved and the conflict between him and the free peoples.

The initial motivation is the important point throughout this whole discussion. Clearly, concisely and repeatedly Tolkien has stated that Sauron felt despair at the inefficiencies and "wasteful friction" of the free races. In fighting, laziness, poor command, lack of ambition in his eyes were "evil" qualities. He sought to bring the good ship "Middle Earth" under his command so that he might direct it all in the same direction. Have everyone working towards common goals.

That point is not an argument. That is what Tolkien wrote about Sauron.

His actions later were "evil", in the same way that any tyrant who wages wars is evil. If Sauron is evil for fighting a war so is every government in the developed world. Sauron fell from the path of "moral accountability" perhaps. His actions were not "morally right". This does not make him pure evil though. I honestly don't understand where the foundation for this argument comes from.

[CENTER][I][FONT=georgia]"Never laugh at live dragons"[/FONT][/I]
[/CENTER]

First of all, that is not a letter. That is the summary of a letter made by someone on Tolkien gateway. It is not written by Tolkien.
If anything, *you* are the one feeding inaccurate sources of what Tolkien said or did not say. I suggest you read the actual letter first.

At least my source is accurate, even if its a summary it contains the content of the letter, yours on the other hand are non-existant and/or twisted the meaning fo what tolkien said to make a point.

Secondly, the letter only disproves your point. It states that Sauron is not wholly evil and that he wanted power and dominion. Since you have just (finally) proven he is not absolute evil, it is impossible that he wanted dominion just for the sake of dominion. Which brings us back around to his goal; his desire to rule over others comes forth from his initial desire to make the world better as he envisioned it.

Did you read what I posted, Tolkien said Sauron is the closest thing to wholly evil, and Ill repeat it he never "envisioned a world as a better place" because he no longer was part of the good side.

So no matter how good and well-meant Sauron's intentions were, he was always going to be thrown in with the evil side because of his evil ways.

Exactly.

For the first part of that; that is the point we have been trying to bring across to you. Sauron had a distorted perspective, but his goal was just. He wanted to rule all other sentient beings, he wanted dominion, he wanted everyone to do as they were told because he thought he knew how to improve the world better than anyone else. A distorted view yes, but a good intention.
And what's wrong with being called a God-king when that is what you are to people?

Sauron isn't Just or Noble, sorry he wanted Dominion over the free peoples to possibly twist them, he twists everything he touches, his wisdom is foul, he is a necromancer...his actions prove he envisioned the "opposite" a twisted world full of evil.

This might be because english is not your native tongue, but you are lamentable at reading his work and deducting the meaning of its content.

Its rather a shame someone like me, considering english is not my native tongue understand better what Tolkien had to say, not backwards like you.

Lastly, I would just like to ask, was that summary you provided all you had to attempt to refute my arguments? If so, does that mean you agree with all my other arguments that you didn't touch?
And does this mean you take back what you said about "false" source material I gave? You made no attempt to provide the "correct" ones even after I asked you.

Its false because it contradicts other letters I have read fully, Tolkien expressed his views about his sub-creation in detail even about Sauron and Melkor motives.

Anyway, I personally believe we all have deep underlying reasons why we swing one way or another in our view about Sauron. For some it might be important to see him as a clear cut evil villain, while others feel a need to investigate his motivation more in depths. I think I need my view to remain open-minded to others as well as self critical in regards to myself. I shall not make public judgements as for the reasons why others might rather want to see him as the absolute evil, although surely we all silently make judgments of some sort - still, the art is to stay respectful nonetheless and to ultimately understand that 'the truth' in issues like this is not simple mathematic where 1+1=2

Well said , I really like to see sauron for what he really is and not over-speculate, I know there are shades of gray but also there is black and white, and when talking about guys like Sauron/Annatar, Melkor/Morgoth you really need to see them as what they represent within tolkien books they are analogies to angelic beigns or demi-gods gone sour...fallen from grace, sure they have their motivation but once he became evil there is no turning back, prime example is Gollum.

Saying Sauron or Melkor are just, noble in the end goal, is insane line of thought, they are by all words evil in Arda and their actions speak about their motives, they are sentient rational beigns correct but they are the opposite of the good guys, even Nature doesn't like Sauron or Melkor.

That point is not an argument. That is what Tolkien wrote about Sauron.

His actions later were "evil", in the same way that any tyrant who wages wars is evil. If Sauron is evil for fighting a war so is every government in the developed world. Sauron fell from the path of "moral accountability" perhaps. His actions were not "morally right". This does not make him pure evil though. I honestly don't understand where the foundation for this argument comes from.

Its does make him purely evil at least in tolkien words "Closest thing to wholly evil", because actions that aren't morally right are the source of evil in Middle earth.

Its by the words of Tolkien, really its on letter#183, find it read it, learn it to heart and accept that Sauron dominating "lesser beigns" is not morally right, calling himself God-King (he been a maiar) may have to do with that...

Its insane to try to say Sauron was striving to make a better world, when his actions and motives point and something else.

At least my source is accurate, even if its a summary it contains the content of the letter, yours on the other hand are non-existant and/or twisted the meaning fo what tolkien said to make a point.

Again you don't even try to dispute my claims. I gave you you direct source quotes with titles and all, and all you can say is that they don't exist or that I twist the meaning, while I didn't even change them at all.
You are basically dragging the debate down to a level of covering your ears and shouting "I can't hear you and you're lying NANANANANA you're wrong".
If you are so convinced my sources are flawed, please, feel free to provide the "real" text.

You must learn to use actual arguments and debate like an adult instead of attempting to make displays of nonsensical theatricality.

Did you read what I posted, Tolkien said Sauron is the closest thing to wholly evil, and Ill repeat it he never "envisioned a world as a better place" because he no longer was part of the good side.

In his mind, he *was* the good side. It was those pesky little Free Peoples who kept doing evil things like spreading chaos. You fail to understand the very nature of morality, it is a conflict to which there is no right answer, it is all in the eye of the beholder. Aragorn did some pretty evil things in his life, both before and after he was crowned king, so to those who joined Sauron's cause, he was the evil tyrant.
If our modern morality system is overhauled in the course of the next few millenia, The Lord of the Rings will be a tragic tale about how a heroic angelic king-on-earth who lost an age-old war at the hands of an evil gnome who sneakily destroyed his greatest work of craft in which he had philanthropically put a great deal of his own power as away of personal sacrifice.
Arda under Sauron's war was just that; a war. There are two sides to a war. While Sauron, being a Maia, had greater capability for evil and cruelty than the Elves and mortal races, it was still the basic idea of a war: he thought he was doing the right thing for Arda, the Free Peoples though tthey were doing the right thing for Arda.

Sauron isn't Just or Noble, sorry he wanted Dominion over the free peoples to possibly twist them, he twists everything he touches, his wisdom is foul, he is a necromancer...his actions prove he envisioned the "opposite" a twisted world full of evil.

Of course he isn't Just or Noble, do try to read what I have been saying in the previous posts. The point is that he started out with a Noble cause, and all the evil that he commited sprang forth from that initial just idea he had.
Do please provide some source material for the rest of your statement. When did he ever envision a twisted world full of evil? That would be a sign of absolute evil, evil just for the sake of being evil, and as you have already admitted earlier, Sauron cannot do that. Now you're just contradicting yourself.

Its rather a shame someone like me, considering english is not my native tongue understand better what Tolkien had to say, not backwards like you.

It's rather a shame you preach the exact opposite of what Tolkien continuously wrote to those who asked him about this sort of stuff.

Its false because it contradicts other letters I have read fully, Tolkien expressed his views about his sub-creation in detail even about Sauron and Melkor motives.

For the fourth time, feel free to give these "other letters you have read fully". I've given you those in which he writes that Sauron is not wholly evil and began his campaign to do good. If you fail to give them once again, i'll just have to conclude you have been lying through your teeth or trolling this whole time.

[I]In the sea without lees standeth the Bird of Hermes.
[/I][I]When all his feathers be from him gone, He standeth still here as a stone.
Here is now both white and red, And all so the stone to quicken the dead[/I][I].
The Bird of Hermes is my name, Eating my wings to make me tame.[/I]

In his mind, he *was* the good side. It was those pesky little Free Peoples who kept doing evil things like spreading chaos. You fail to understand the very nature of morality, it is a conflict to which there is no right answer, it is all in the eye of the beholder. Aragorn did some pretty evil things in his life, both before and after he was crowned king, so to those who joined Sauron's cause, he was the evil tyrant.
If our modern morality system is overhauled in the course of the next few millenia, The Lord of the Rings will be a tragic tale about how a heroic angelic king-on-earth who lost an age-old war at the hands of an evil gnome who sneakily destroyed his greatest work of craft in which he had philanthropically put a great deal of his own power as away of personal sacrifice.
Arda under Sauron's war was just that; a war. There are two sides to a war. While Sauron, being a Maia, had greater capability for evil and cruelty than the Elves and mortal races, it was still the basic idea of a war: he thought he was doing the right thing for Arda, the Free Peoples though tthey were doing the right thing for Arda.

This will never be Lord of The rings I know, maybe in a parallel universe Sauron is the good guy, but not in our reality gladly.

Of course he isn't Just or Noble, do try to read what I have been saying in the previous posts. The point is that he started out with a Noble cause, and all the evil that he commited sprang forth from that initial just idea he had.
Do please provide some source material for the rest of your statement. When did he ever envision a twisted world full of evil? That would be a sign of absolute evil, evil just for the sake of being evil, and as you have already admitted earlier, Sauron cannot do that. Now you're just contradicting yourself.

I prove you with logic alone, Ill explain:

"Sauron was become now a sorcerer of dreadful power, master of shadows and of phantoms, foul in wisdom, cruel in strength, misshaping what he touched, twisting what he ruled, lord of werewolves; his dominion was torment.
—J.R.R. Tolkien"

Logically, Sauron wanted to cause torment, his wisdom is foul, his order is cruel, his missshaped what he touched, twisted what he ruled, he was himself a shape-shifter "Licantrope". So no his end-goal wasn't a better world unless torment means better.

For the fourth time, feel free to give these "other letters you have read fully". I've given you those in which he writes that Sauron is not wholly evil and began his campaign to do good. If you fail to give them once again, i'll just have to conclude you have been lying through your teeth or trolling this whole time.

[I]In the sea without lees standeth the Bird of Hermes.
[/I][I]When all his feathers be from him gone, He standeth still here as a stone.
Here is now both white and red, And all so the stone to quicken the dead[/I][I].
The Bird of Hermes is my name, Eating my wings to make me tame.[/I]

Well said , I really like to see sauron for what he really is and not over-speculate, I know there are shades of gray but also there is black and white, and when talking about guys like Sauron/Annatar, Melkor/Morgoth you really need to see them as what they represent within tolkien books they are analogies to angelic beigns or demi-gods gone sour...fallen from grace, sure they have their motivation but once he became evil there is no turning back, prime example is Gollum.

See, one problem I feel I spot here is wording... I for example will definitely not claim that my thoughts on a possible alternative motive are 'the ultimate truth', and I hope at least that I have in all my posts made clear that any of what I have shared is 'my' opinion or are 'my' ponderings. The above on the other hand uses phrases like 'for what he really is' and 'you really need to see'. We are talking view points here, not absolutes. This is not 1+1=2, and I personally believe the replies have overall shown how complicated the matter of 'evil' is, but again - this is 'my' view. You are free to disagree and to feel all those replies proved something completly different, but the moment you turn around and tell us (who do not agree with your view) that we are down right 'wrong', and that we 'have' to share your view, is the moment where you in 'my' opinion ironically begin to set foot on a similar path as the one you so majorly seem to condemn...

Originally Posted by Al.

Saying Sauron or Melkor are just, noble in the end goal, is insane line of thought, they are by all words evil in Arda and their actions speak about their motives, they are sentient rational beigns correct but they are the opposite of the good guys, even Nature doesn't like Sauron or Melkor.

As far as I recall (I could recall this wrong though) Tolkien hinted occasionally on that he wished to see his tale as some actual history of this planet. Now if I look at this planet and its current state of wars, polution and injustice (mind you, all of this viewed and judged from 'my' idea on what peace means, none polution and justice) - I am somewhat left to wonder what Sauron's world would have looked like and could it be much worse. Had we available some weird dimension travel, and parallel time worlds would exist, what if we'd find Sauron's world to actually have no wars, to know only clean fresh air and water, and injustice has long been overcome? How would we view his efforts and methods then?

I am sorry, AI, but while I deeply condemn the methods Sauron used, I can not also straight out condemn what at least appears to have been his initial motivation, and btw, I grant this same benefit of a doubt to the Valar, as elsewise I'd just be wondering why they sit in their appearantly cosy lil 'home', doing almost nothing but fret about two others of their kind maybe taking over. It never seems to me about suffering as a whole for them, but maybe their hands are tied. Maybe they can not intervene on a bigger scale for very understandable reasons.

The characters and the story of Middle Earth did flow from Tolkien's pen, but the principles touched by it are not of Tolkien's invention, and while the discussion here for a big part is about a specific character of his story - it at the same time is also about far deeper reaching dilemmas, or at least it is for me, and the current development of this thread additionally seems to prove how difficult it can be to even just debate them.

I do not agree with all those who submitted view points voiced in this thread, but I surely respect each and every one and am grateful they stepped forward to voice them. Please everyone keep 'personal' to personal view, not personal attack...

Fact: I think we, who have read some of Tolkien's letters, would agree that Tolkien has stated that Sauron did not start out as "evil".

Question: Is there reason to believe that Tolkien was lying, and that he really did create Sauron an an evil entity from the start?

===

Fact: Sauron started a war against the "free peoples" of middle-earth.

Question: Did the free peoples fight a war against evil, or a war of defense against Sauron?

===

Fact: Orcs, Trolls, etc. are thought of as evil creatures and always seem to wish harm to the free peoples.

Question: Are these creatures evil in their basic nature, or are they unattractive (unattractive to the free peoples) and gullible creatures that are easily led by Sauron to wreak havoc against the free peoples?

===

Facts: Saruman started out as an agent of the Valar, sent to middle-earth to guide folks in their efforts against dominion by Sauron. Saruman made war against the free peoples and attempted to gain dominion in middle-earth.

Question: Did Saruman change because he thought he knew a better way (as opposed to the white council's way) to achieve peace for middle-earth?

Did Sauron fall into a similar trap?

Did both Sauron and Saruman decide that the Valar (as beings detached and distant from on-the-ground observers) were incorrect in their assessment of what was best for the peoples of middle-earth?

"Just like Mary Shelly, Just like Frankenstein, Break your chains, Count your change, And try to walk the line"

See, one problem I feel I spot here is wording... I for example will definitely not claim that my thoughts on a possible alternative motive are 'the ultimate truth', and I hope at least that I have in all my posts made clear that any of what I have shared is 'my' opinion or are 'my' ponderings. The above on the other hand uses phrases like 'for what he really is' and 'you really need to see'. We are talking view points here, not absolutes. This is not 1+1=2, and I personally believe the replies have overall shown how complicated the matter of 'evil' is, but again - this is 'my' view. You are free to disagree and to feel all those replies proved something completly different, but the moment you turn around and tell us (who do not agree with your view) that we are down right 'wrong', and that we 'have' to share your view, is the moment where you in 'my' opinion ironically begin to set foot on a similar path as the one you so majorly seem to condemn...

Ok, I would just add that somethings in search for answers, something you may not like arises, nature of evil for example in Middle earth, obviously in real life there are opinion with valid points other opinions without valid point, how do you distinguish them? well opinions based on facts are the closer thing to the truth, I would gladly change my point of view if someone came up and lay down facts and context within that fact saying "Sauron was actually trying to make a better world", but there isn't too many facts to go that way..in fact its in reverse, Sauron is the enemy he is on the "wrong side", people don't like when talking hard facts, some take time to even accept it, but really when "envisioning an alternate view" like your doing Starina you have to be careful to remember "you are envisioning" and maybe the reality was opposite, you are thinking for the characters while there is no proof of that.

To Boraxxe
Facts and questions:

Fact: I think we, who have read some of Tolkien's letters, would agree that Tolkien has stated that Sauron did not start out as "evil".

Question: Is there reason to believe that Tolkien was lying, and that he really did create Sauron an an evil entity from the start?
No Sauron as entity started good or at least in the good side, Tolkien wasn't lying.

===

Fact: Sauron started a war against the "free peoples" of middle-earth.

Question: Did the free peoples fight a war against evil, or a war of defense against Sauron?
Its safe to say the free peoples defended themselves from the start.

===

Fact: Orcs, Trolls, etc. are thought of as evil creatures and always seem to wish harm to the free peoples.

Question: Are these creatures evil in their basic nature, or are they unattractive (unattractive to the free peoples) and gullible creatures that are easily led by Sauron to wreak havoc against the free peoples?
Orcs, Trolls, etc are tools of the enemy mockery of the living things, they are used as Sauron as you described boraxxe and are servants bound to the will of Sauron.

===

Facts: Saruman started out as an agent of the Valar, sent to middle-earth to guide folks in their efforts against dominion by Sauron. Saruman made war against the free peoples and attempted to gain dominion in middle-earth.

Question: Did Saruman change because he thought he knew a better way (as opposed to the white council's way) to achieve peace for middle-earth?
Saruman fall because he admired Sauron Aritifice and he changed from been Saruman the white to Saruman of many colors because he was twisted by sauron or at least manipulated in thinking they could achieve more doing evil.

Did Sauron fall into a similar trap?
Yes

Did both Sauron and Saruman decide that the Valar (as beings detached and distant from on-the-ground observers) were incorrect in their assessment of what was best for the peoples of middle-earth?
Yes, and that makes them enemies of the protectors of the Children of Eru, the Valar even if seated in valinor their mission was the assure the well-being of elves, men, dwarves, etc.

Yes, and that makes them enemies of the protectors of the Children of Eru, the Valar even if seated in valinor their mission was the assure the well-being of elves, men, dwarves, etc.

You keep making this jump and then justifiying it with unusual quotes that don't actually back up your point.

Yes, Sauron was the enemy of the Children of Eru.

This does not make him evil. The Children of Eru were enemies of Sauron. Does that make them evil? Being an enemy of someone is not evil.

Both the Valar and Sauron believed they were doing what was best. Once again, I won't post the quotes yet again since they're already in this thread myriad times and since you know all Tolkien's letters by heart you can go and look them up yourself.

There are two sides in the book. The Free Peoples' side, and Sauron's side. Emphatically and repeatedly Tolkien has stated that they do not represent polar good and evil. He has said this. If you choose to ignore that and say "No, Freeps are pure good, Sauron is pure evil" then there is no point me carrying on.

The story is told from the side of the free peoples, so their enemy, Sauron, is presented as the "evil" one. Obviously.

The desire to control and dominate all "lesser beings" (I see you've now stopped arguing that he wanted to destroy them all, since that is plainly refuted by Tolkien) is, on the face of it, an evil act.

The motive behind that desire was to improve the world, as Sauron saw it. This, again, is repeatedly stated by Tokien. So, as I, Tolkien and many others have repeatedly said, Sauron is not "pure evil". His motive was a good one, in his mind. He was not bitter, jealous or resentful of creation in the way Melkor was. Sauron was frustrated by the lack of order.

You're missing all the finer points of this argument, and even the finer points of your own quoted material. Sauron v Aragorn is not black and white. It's not Good V Evil. Sauron is not polar, pure evil.

You're not arguing with me anymore, you're arguing with Tolkien now.

[CENTER][I][FONT=georgia]"Never laugh at live dragons"[/FONT][/I]
[/CENTER]

"Never attempt to reason with people who know they are right!"
Frank Herbert

Excellent quote, hey boraxxe did I pass the test of lore, I really think you could bring some light on this you know a lot of the lore to tell these guys about nature of evil in Middle-earth, hopefully you can help.

Well AI, I am not sure I can help.
When it comes to lore it seems that you are the king.

I can contribute in a way that I am sure you can verify:

The Last King (by Wink and Elvisa)While teaching Elvink and Wisa their letters Elvisa and I stumbled upon an old parchment.
We were studying in the Mathom House in Michel Delving and Wisa spied this scrap poking out of a crack in the wall.

For homework, we had the kids scribe the entire thing anew.
Something should be said here about how Hobbits have a habit of turning words. Baranduin into Brandywine... etc.
Well, here it seems as if they have turned King Arvedui's name to sound like "Ar-vey-doo-eye"
(forbearance is begged of Don McLean)

A long, long time ago... I can still remember How the Dunedain would make me smile. I dreamt at night of Elenna The mountain of Meneltarma And stories of the Star-Wards on their isle

But tales of war they made me shiver With every letter I'd deliver Bad news in the Shire The Northland all afire.

I do remember that I weeped When I heard about the broken Keep Our hopes for peace were set aside The day the Last King died

So farewell Good King Arvedui Drove my wagon to the Dragon But the ale taps were dry The Shire folk watched as the smoke drifted by Singin' "on this day the last King died on this day the last King died"

Can you learn to sing a song? And do you yearn for the lords long gone? If your gaffer tells you to? And do you believe in men of yore? And do you listen to tales of lore? Do you think those old tales can be true?

Well, I know that you've got Tookish kin Cause I saw you take one on the chin You stood up in his face And you put him in his place

I was a lonely tweenage prancin' Took With my nose always stuck in a book But I was there the day the whole world shook The day the last King died

I started singin' Farewell Good King Arvedui Drove my wagon to the Dragon But the ale taps were dry The Shire folk watched as the smoke drifted by Singin' "on this day the last King died on this day the last King died"

Now for ten years we've looked for the host We sent to war in far Fornost But none have come back don't you see Where the grass runs red where it was green Brave young archers lie in death unclean With their limbs torn they were lost in misery

Oh, and while the King was fleeing west Gondor's fleet delayed in test The Angmar host was swelled He fled to Forochel And when Cirdan sent a ship up north The Snow-men warned againt this course He gave Barahir's ring with remorse The day the last King died

We were singin' Farewell Good King Arvedui Drove my wagon to the Dragon But the ale taps were dry The Shire folk watched as the smoke drifted by Singin' "on this day the last King died on this day the last King died"

Shiver quiver in the winter weather The ship was crushed like a fragile feather Pinched in ice and sinking fast Men were hanging onto the mast The ship was hit with a wintry blast The King stood and went down with it at last

Now one palantir was stored in the hold The other placed with the ancient gold They both went down at noon Now they share their watery doom One hied from down in Amon Sul From Annuminas came the other jewel Now he will use neither tool Yes now, the King has died

We started singin' Farewell Good King Arvedui Drove my wagon to the Dragon But the ale taps were dry The Shire folk watched as the smoke drifted by Singin' "on this day the last King died on this day the last King died"

Oh, and then with them all in one place The host of Gondor pressed the pace They pushed them all up north again So on came Eanur, and he came on quick The Witch-king tried just one last trick But evil, that is Sauron's only friend

But as they watched he escaped the cage Their hands were clenched on blades in rage A ring-wraith forged in hell The Witch-king weaved his spell And as Mordor's dread filled them with fright They cowered in the growing night And saw the Witch-king laughing in delight The day the last King died

We were singin' Farewell Good King Arvedui Drove my wagon to the Dragon But the ale taps were dry The Shire folk watched as the smoke drifted by Singin' "on this day the last King died on this day the last King died"

I met a lass from Delving mews And I asked her for some farthing news, But she just frowned and turned away. I went to the Bird and Baby Inn Where cheer and joy had always been But the barman: he said "please, just go away"

Now in the fields: no children sang, The crops were dead, no cowbells rang. And not a word was spoken; Their hearts were all but broken And now we miss the Dunedain host The elves have gone off to the coast The kingdom withers like a ghost And now the King has died

And they were singin' Farewell Good King Arvedui Drove my wagon to the Dragon But the ale taps were dry The Shire folk watched as the smoke drifted by Singin' "on this day the last King died on this day the last King died"

They were singin' Farewell Good King Arvedui Drove my wagon to the Dragon But the ale taps were dry The Shire folk watched as the smoke drifted by Singin' "on this day the last King died

"Just like Mary Shelly, Just like Frankenstein, Break your chains, Count your change, And try to walk the line"

I started singin'
Farewell Good King Arvedui
Drove my wagon to the Dragon
But the ale taps were dry
The Shire folk watched as the smoke drifted by
Singin' "on this day the last King died
on this day the last King died"

This makes me happy.

[CENTER][I][FONT=georgia]"Never laugh at live dragons"[/FONT][/I]
[/CENTER]

Ok, I would just add that somethings in search for answers, something you may not like arises, nature of evil for example in Middle earth

I am very prepared when searching for answers to accept them, but I do not believe in 'demonizing the enemey'. I rather prefer to understand an opposer, to find what reasons another might have to fight for their view point. The very fact that in most cases either side believes to be 'in the right', shows how complicated the issue of disagreeing can be, and while I surely have my own preferances in all sorts of matters, I personally try to realize that others have their preferances just the same, for reasons I feel I can not blindly condemn.

Originally Posted by Al.

obviously in real life there are opinion with valid points other opinions without valid point, how do you distinguish them?

Do I have the right to call other view points invalid?
This is indeed stuff of headache and borderline insanity if you delve deep enough into the subject matter of 'right/wrong', 'good/evil', 'valid/not valid'. Many many philosophical dilemmas involved...

I liked those questions, Boraxxe, and that poem, thank you for posting it (I'd try to honour all those questions with responses, but would probably end with a book lengths post :P)

Question: Is there reason to believe that Tolkien was lying, and that he really did create Sauron an an evil entity from the start?

Yeah, Tolkien really did create Sauron as an evil entity from the start of his writings. Why? His story needed a villain. And Sauron is the villain. He doesn't come across as sympathetic in any of the published material. And then in the later publishing of his notes and letters, he still isn't a very strong sympathetic villain.

Magneto is a great example of a sympathetic villain. He has very emotional very powerful reasons for taking villainous action. Reasons people can empathize with. Sauron, not so much.